篇章数

35

引证文献

0 !

参考文献

141

法治发展与法治模式:中国与芬兰的比较图书

Rule of Law in China and Finland : Comparative Studies of Their Development History and Model

SSAPID:101-6373-8786-90
ISBN:978-7-5097-4600-4
DOI:
ISSN:

[内容简介] 芬兰虽地处北欧,人口和国土面积与中国不可同日而言,但芬兰独特的历史文化、社会结构和法律制度,使芬兰成为经济发达、社会和谐、政治昌明、法治完善的国家。特别是其不同于一般西方国家的政治体制和法律理念,为中芬的法学交流提供了得天独厚的背景和基础。呈现给读者的是中国社会科学院和芬兰科学院共同举办的第二、三届中芬比较法国际研讨会的优秀成果。两次研讨会均围绕法治的理论和实践问题展开研讨。现在收入本论文集的论文既涉及法治的重要理论问题,如法治模式、法治价值、法治变迁等,也有重要的法治实践课题,如宪法实施、行政法治、经济社会管理、刑事司法,等等。本论文集将有助于读者了解芬兰乃至北欧国家法治的独特魅力、中国法治理论和实践的最新进展,促进中国和北欧法治模式和法律制度的相互借鉴,为建设“法治中国”提供理论支撑和智识支持。

相关信息

丛书名:中国法治论坛
作 者: 李林 谢增毅
编 辑:张慧强;关晶焱
出版社:社会科学文献出版社
出版时间: 2013年06月
语 种:中文
中图分类:D9 法律

 Postscript

 序言

 Preface to China Forum on the Rule of Law

 总序

 “中国法治论坛”编辑委员会

 后记

 第一部分 法治模式与法治变迁

  中国法治的现状、挑战与未来发展

   一 中国法治现状的评价

    (一)法学界、法律界对于中国法治状况的评价

    (二)民间对于中国法治状况的评价

    (三)地方法治指数的评价

   二 中国法治面临的主要挑战

   三 中国法治的未来发展

    1.高度重视法治建设,全面推进依法治国

    2.充分发挥法治在社会主义现代化建设和全面建成小康社会中的重要作用

    3.继续推进民主立法、科学立法,不断完善法律体系

    4.切实加强宪法和法律实施

    5.全面推进依法行政,加快建设法治政府

    6.继续深化司法体制改革,保证司法独立,实现公正司法

    7.进一步加强人权的法治保障

    8.用法治思维和法治方式“反腐治权”

  法治

   Ⅰ.Legalist Tradition of Rechsstaat

   Ⅱ. Constitutional Developments in Brief

   Ⅲ. Nordic Comparisons

   Ⅳ.Core Principles of the Finnish Constitution

    1.General Remarks

    2.Core Principles

     Inviolability of human dignity

     Freedom and rights of the individual

     Promotion of justice in society

     State Sovereignty,participation in international co-operation and EU-membership

     People’s sovereignty and democracy

     Separation of powers and parliamentarism

    3.Conclusion

   Ⅴ.Rule of Law in Current Constitutional Context

  芬兰法治模式的特点和新发展

   一 中芬关系及法律领域的交流概述

   二 芬兰法治模式的特点和新发展

    (一)北欧法治模式具有自身特点

    (二)芬兰宪法改革的新进展

    (三)芬兰国会宪法委员会制度独树一帜

    (四)芬兰最高行政法院的特色

    (五)芬兰最高法院的特色

    (六)芬兰检察官制度的特色

    (七)国会监察官制度的特色

    (八)人权法地位上升

    (九)芬兰轻刑化政策取得成功

   三 双方表达了加强中芬包括法学在内的社会科学交流的真诚意愿

  中国法治的人文道路

   一 两种人文主义:西方与中国

    1.摆脱宗教和神的束缚,从人出发并以人为中心来观察和思考世界

    2.意志自由,充分认可人的能力和尊严

    3.立足自然世界和人的自然本性

    4.在认知上,以人的经验和理性为判断根据

   二 法治的三种模式:法家、儒家与西方

   三 迈向道德的民主法治

    (一)沿着个人权利和社会秩序,从外在客观方面打造民主法治的理性基础

    (二)存留德性认知的生发空间,实现自然权利与仁义道德的历史衔接

    (三)构建道德的民主法治,开拓民主政治下的为民之道

  论法律的渊源

   Ⅰ.Strongly Binding Sources of Law

   Ⅱ.Weakly Binding Sources of Law

   Ⅲ.Permitted Sources of Law

   Ⅳ.Forbidden Sources of Law

  社会管理创新的法制化路径

   一 人类诉讼文明发展与司法权配置优化

   二 司法权配置的要素

    (一)司法权配合要素

    (二)司法权制约要素

     1.以power制衡power

     2.以right制衡power

  熟悉与陌生之间:中国法治的自我建构和方向性选择

   一

   二

    (一)“统”与“治”的辩证历史

    (二)作为自治体系的国家制度

    (三)民主“四化”建设:有待完成的国家制度任务

   三

    (一)私权观念的兴起

    (二)妥协的权利

    (三)调解与律师的职业伦理

   四

    (一)无赖与父母官

    (二)“养”与“敬”的背离

    (三)伦理义务与法律责任

   五

    (一)民族国家与文明国家

    (二)国家主义意识的缺乏

    (三)去熟人化:对抗的现代性问题

    (四)自由建构新熟人社会

   六

  法治与宽容原则

   一 法治与宽容原则

   二 法哲学上的宽容原则

   三 宽容原则的价值

   四 结语

  社会转型背景下的中国近代法律变迁

   一 条约制度与近代中国社会的转型

   二 领事裁判权制度与晚清法律改革

   三 中华民国的法律变迁

    1.北京政府时期的法律制度

    2.南京国民政府时期的法律制度

   四 小结

  中国古代法律发展的基本进程与模式

   一 中国法律的起源与初建——夏商周法律

   二 法家思想主导阶段

   三 儒家化法律的形成与发展

  法律的统一化:从欧洲到全球的方法

   Ⅰ. Harmonization of European Legal Systems

   Ⅱ. Historical Dimensions of Harmonization

   Ⅲ. Towards a Global Perspective

  论国际法上对非强迫性干涉之禁止

   一 引言

   二 西方主流意见:强迫和干涉的同构性

   三 非强迫性干涉:学者学说与实践

    1.学说

    2.非强迫性干涉的个案研究:过急的承认

    3.其他形式的非强迫性干涉

    4.小结

   四 国际法上禁止非强迫性干涉的一般公式探讨

    1.干涉对象与干涉手段

    2.非强迫性干涉的法律基础

    3.对国际法院论断的语境分析

   五 强迫性和非强迫性干涉的内在统一性

   六 不干涉原则与中国的核心利益

 第二部分 宪法实施与行政法治

  中国的准违宪审查研究

   一 为什么是准违宪审查

   二 内地准违宪审查实践

    (一)全国人大及其常委会的合宪性决定

    (二)立法和法规规章清理

     1.全国人大常委会的法律法规集中清理

     2.国务院进行的法规规章清理

     3.地方人大或常委会进行的法规规章清理

    (三)大陆地区人民法院的司法审查

   三 港澳基本法下的准违宪审查

    (一)香港特区的地区性违宪审查

     1.回归前的准违宪审查

     2.回归后的准违宪审查

    (二)澳门特区的地区性违宪审查

     1.回归前的准违宪审查

     2.回归后的准违宪审查

   四 准违宪审查的意义及展望

  论宪法审查中的合宪限定解释

   一 概说

   二 不同审查模式下的合宪限定解释方法比较

    (一)具体审查模式

    (二)抽象审查模式

   三 合宪限定解释方法的逻辑结构

   四 合宪限定解释方法的正当性

   五 合宪限定解释方法的界限

    (一)形式界限:文意的射程范围

    (二)宪法审查机关的功能界限

    (三)解释学循环意义上的界限

   六 结语

  法律体系中的合宪性审查机制

   一 法律的合宪性审查

    (一)法律的合宪性审查主体

    (二)法律合宪性审查运行机制

    (三)完善法律合宪性审查机制的建议

   二 法规的合宪性与合法性审查

    (一)法规合宪性与合法性审查主体

    (二)法规合宪性与合法性审查运行机制

    (三)完善法规合宪性与合法性审查机制的建议

   三 司法审查的范围:从规章到法规

  日本对“平等保护”问题的司法审查

   一 导论:日本平等保护原则的发展

   二 日本法院对平等保护原则的运用

   三 合理差别与审查标准

  建立立法监督与制约相分离的合法性审查机制

   一 规范性文件的性质及法律效力

   二 立法监督制度的基本功能在于保障立法职权的有效行使

   三 立法制约制度的基本功能旨在维护法制的统一性

  中芬具有宪法特征的自治地区

   Ⅰ.Introduction

   Ⅱ.International Commitments as a Backdrop

   Ⅲ.Incorporation of the Commitment into National Law

   Ⅳ.Entrenchment of Autonomy Arrangements

   Ⅴ.Distribution of Powers by Enumeration

   Ⅵ.Peculiarities of Competence Control

   Ⅶ.From Comparison to Constitutional Rules:Formulating the Normative Challenge

  中国行政法治的发展历程及其主要特征

   导论

   一 改革开放以前行政法制的缺失

   二 八十年代行政法治基本格局的奠定

    (一)行政法治建设的主要成就

     1.确立法对行政的支配地位

     2.形成有中国特色的司法审查体系

     3.行政管理立法活跃、新型立法体制得到确立

     4.行政复议成为与行政诉讼相辅相成的行政救济渠道

     5.行政组织法制化成绩显著

     6.政府法制工作专门化取得明显进展

    (二) 改革开放初期行政法治建设的局限性

   三 九十年代行政法治的积淀与发展

    (一)市场经济为行政法治开辟广阔前景

    (二)《行政诉讼法》推动行政法全面发展

     1.《行政复议条例》与《行政复议法》

     2.《国家赔偿法》

     3.《行政处罚法》

    (三)行政内部法制建设取得新的突破

    (四)问题与不足

   四 新世纪行政法治的升级与深化

    (一)新世纪行政法治发展的机遇与挑战

     1.加入世界贸易组织是新世纪行政法治发展进步的重要外因

     2.法治政府理念的形成

     3.人权入宪的积极影响

    (二)新时期行政法治建设取得的主要成果

     1.《行政许可法》的制定与实施

     2.其他重要成果

   五 中国行政法治的主要特征

  法治和行政程序

   Ⅰ.Introduction

   Ⅱ.Good Administration/Good Governance

   Ⅲ.Background to the Reform of the Administrative Procedure Act

   Ⅳ.The Finnish Administrative Procedure Act

   Ⅴ.Comparative Aspects

   Ⅵ.Conclusion

  新中国行政复议制度的历史变迁与发展

   一 行政复议制度的规范变迁史

    1.新中国成立后至《行政复议条例》颁布前(1949~1990年)

    2.《行政复议条例》 颁行至《行政复议法》 实施前(1991~1999年)

    3.《行政复议法》的早期规范体系(1999~2007年)

    4.行政复议规范体系的新近发展(2007年至今)

   二 行政复议制度实施情况的变化

   三 行政复议制度的历史启示与走向问题

    1.行政复议委员会:未被充分认识的体制变革思路

    2. 司法化与政治化:未被充分讨论的程序变革思路

  法治和芬兰的行政执行

   Ⅰ.Introduction:Three Elements of the Rule of Law

   Ⅱ. Rules and Principles Constituting Administrative Law

    Varieties of administrative activity

    Principal legal sources of administrative law

   Ⅲ. Right to Good Administration

   Ⅳ.Openness and Access to Information

    Right of access

    Obligation to promote openness

    Presumption of accessibility and official secrets

   Ⅳ.General Principles of Administrative Law

    The role of administrative law principles

    The five central principles

    The service principle

   Ⅵ. Rule of Law and Official Accountability

    The principle of legality and exercise of administrative powers

    Oversight of legality

   Ⅶ.Access to Justice and Judicial Review

    General access to a court

    Judicial review of administrative decisions

    Fair trial in administrative matters

    The role of the administrative courts

   Ⅷ.Conclusion:New Developments

  中国行政拘禁制度的现状与改革

   一 概说

    (一)行政拘禁的概念与范围

    (二)行政拘禁与保安处分

    (三)行政拘禁概念与《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》

   二 中国行政拘禁制度的现状

    (一) 劳动教养

     1.概念

     2.法律依据

     3.法律性质

     4.决定与执行

    (二)收容教育

     1.概念

     2.法律依据和性质

     3.决定与执行

    (三)收容教养*

     1.概念

     2.法律依据

     3.法律性质

     4.决定与执行

    (四)强制性戒毒*

     1.概念

     2.法律依据

     3.性质

     4.决定与执行

    (五)对精神病人的强制治疗

     1.概念

     2.法律依据

     3.法律性质

     4.决定与执行

    (六)强制隔离

     1.概念

     2.法律依据

     3.法律性质

     4.决定与执行

    (七)行政管束

    (八)留置盘问

     1.概念

     2.法律依据

     3.法律性质

     4.决定与执行

    (九)行政拘留与立即拘留

    (十)其他相关措施

     1.“双规”与“双指”

     2.工读学校

     3.法制学校教育

   三 我国行政拘禁制度的改革

    (一)人性尊严原则与行政拘禁

    (二)依法行政原则

     1.法律保留原则

     2.法律优位原则

    (三)比例原则、平等原则与行政拘禁制度

     1.比例原则

     2.平等原则

    (四)正当程序与行政拘禁制度

    (五)权利救济与行政拘禁

     1.完善司法审查制度,增强司法救济的实效性

     2.设立公安(警察)行政复议委员会,增强行政复议的公正性

     3.建立中国的督察专员制度,创新监督和救济手段

     4.扩大对违法受到行政拘禁的公民的国家赔偿范围

 第三部分 刑事法治与经济社会管理法治

  刑事司法的伦理学

   Ⅰ. Introduction

   Ⅱ. Reconstructing a Democratic Rechtsstaat

   Ⅲ. Criminal Justice as Part of a Normative Reconstruction of a Democratic Rechtsstaat

   Ⅳ.From Rechtsstaat to Rechtsstaatlichkeit

   Ⅴ.The Ethics of Criminal Justice

   Ⅵ. Repressive Justice?

  法治和刑法:芬兰的刑法宪法化

   Introduction

   The Rule of Law or Rule by Law?Festschrift in Honour of Raimo Lahti(Forum Iuris,Helsinki,2007),pp.189-206.">*

   The Constitutionalization of Criminal Law

   The Principle of Legality

   Conclusion

  中国死刑改革的回顾与展望

   一 司法上慎用死刑

   二 立法上削减死刑

   三 死刑的进一步压缩

   四 死刑改革中的几项具体制度

    (一)关于死刑复核中的检察监督

    (二)关于统一死刑执行方式

    (三)关于死刑执行主体与宣判主体的分离

    (四)关于建立死刑案件的特赦制度

  刑法的设计

   Ⅰ.Introduction

   Ⅱ.The Foundations of Criminal Justice Policy in Finland

   Ⅲ.The Total Reform of the Finnish Penal Code (1972—1999—?)

   Ⅳ.The Substantive Design of Finnish Criminal Law

   Ⅴ.The Formal Criteria on the Design of Finnish Criminal Law

   Ⅵ.Conclusion

  毒品控制与毒品刑法

  芬兰监狱人口的规制

   Ⅰ.Introduction

   Ⅱ.The Decline of Imprisonment in Finland

    A. The reform-ideology of the 1960s and the 1970s

     Against coercive care

     Broadening the aims and means of criminal policy

     The function of criminal justice:Indirect general prevention

     Sentencing:humane neo-classicism

    B. Legislative reforms and sentencing practices

     General structure of sanctions in 1950-1990

     Reducing the penalty-scales for specific offenses

     Specific offender-groups

     Community service

     Parole

   Ⅲ.Causes and Consequences

    A. Explaining penal liberalization

     Political culture

     Media

     Nordic co-operation

     Judicial culture and sentencing structures

     Socio-economic and political factors

    B. Imprisonment rates and crime rates

   Ⅳ. Mixed Trends

    A. The punitive turn of the late 1990s

     Legislative changes in violent and sexual offenses

     Explaining the post 1990s punitive turn

    B. Reforming the sanction systems in the 2000s

     Sanction reforms as “safety valves”

     Reducing the number of fine defaulters

     Prison reform 2006

     Electronic monitoring

    C. Measuring the effects of the policy reforms 1998-2010

     Penal aggravations 1999-2005

     Penal mitigations 2005-2010

   Ⅴ. Criminal Sanctions Today

    Fines

    Imprisonment

    Conditional imprisonment

    Community service

    Youth justice

    Sentencing principles

    Sentencing practice

   Ⅵ.The Role of Resterative Justice-mediation

    The process

    Aims and achievements

    Practice

   Ⅶ.Conclusions

  程序改革中的效率和正义:口头听证的起伏

   Introduction*

   Ⅰ.The Council of Europe and the Law of Procedure

    Human Rights

    Recommendations

    Procedural Reform

    Concluding on Reform Policy

   Ⅱ.Case Study:Finland

    The Background of the Reform

    The Reform of Civil Procedure

    Shortcomings of the Reform

    Subsequent Developments

    Appeal

    Remedies for excessive length of the trial

    Court Structure

    Conclusion

  社会管理创新的法治框架与人文环境

   一 社会管理的基本问题——价值定位与模式选择

   二 公权与私权结合——权力配置再审视

   三 国家责任与社会责任分担——社会治理方式变革

   四 人的相互包容与合作——社会关系均衡

  中小型企业视角下的芬兰有限责任公司法

   Ⅰ.Introduction

   Ⅱ.Other Finnish Company Forms in General

   Ⅲ.Is One Limited Liability Company Form Enough?

   Ⅳ.How could the Companies Act be Developed to Suit the Needs of SMEs?

   Ⅴ.Conclusions

  消费者法:芬兰消费者法的发展及主要原则概述

   Ⅰ.Introduction

    1.The Nordic model of consumer protection

    2.The influence of European Union consumer law

   Ⅱ.Regulation of Marketing

    1.The general structure

    2.The supervision of marketing

    3.Case law

    4.The new full harmonisation directive

   Ⅲ.Consumer Contract Law

    1.General

    2.Cooling-off periods

    3.Mandatory provisions of consumer contract law

    4.Prohibition to use unfair contract terms in consumer contracts

    5.Voidness and adjustment of unfair contract terms

    6.Transparency and interpretation of contract terms

    7.The future of consumer contract law

   Ⅳ.The Settlement of Consumer Disputes

    1.The out-of-court settlement

    2.The court procedure

    3.Group action for compensation

   Ⅴ.Conclusions

  社会管理创新的法制化路径

   一 中国的社会管理中存在的问题

   二 中国社会管理创新的价值取向及基本路径

    (一)坚持以人为本

    (二)贯彻服务为民原则

    (三)实现社会管理的公平正义

    (四)践行法律至上原则

    (五)实现社会管理上的公开透明

   三 中国社会管理创新的法制化方向

    (一)服务型法治政府构建

    (二)社会管理体制创新的法制化保障

    (三)社会管理的司法协助

    (四)市民社会培育与社会自治的法律及制度构建

  法治视野下社会管理的路径分析

   一 法治与社会管理

    (一)法治与社会管理的基本内涵

    (二)法治与社会管理的逻辑关系

   二 当前社会管理面临的突出问题

    1.社会管理职能的迟缓性

    2.社会管理权威的弱化性

    3.社会管理手段的滞后性

    4.社会管理利益的局限性

   三 法治视野下社会管理的路径分析

    (一)以法治理念为基点,实现社会管理主体的多元性

    (二)以法治手段为依据,实现社会管理措施的规范性

    (三)以法治原则为界限,实现社会管理职能的目的性

    (四)以法治程序为始终,实现社会管理过程的正义性

    (五)以法治监督为保障,实现社会管理责任的制度性

    (六)以法治价值为评估,实现社会管理成效的明显性

 Preface

芬兰虽地处北欧,人口和国土面积与中国不可同日而语,但芬兰独特的历史文化、社会结构和法律制度,使芬兰成为经济发达、社会和谐、政治昌明、法治完善的国家。特别是其不同于一般西方国家的政治体制和法律理念,为中芬的法学交流提供了得天独厚的背景和基础。本书是中国社会科学院和芬兰科学院共同举办的第二、三届中芬比较法国际研讨会的优秀成果。两次研讨会均围绕法治的理论和实践问题展开研讨。收入本书的论文既涉及法治的重要理论问题,如法治模式、法治价值、法治变迁等,也有重要的法治实践课题,如宪法实施、行政法治、经济社会管理法治、刑事司法等。本书将有助于读者了解芬兰乃至北欧国家法治的独特魅力、中国法治理论和实践的最新进展,促进中国和北欧法治模式和法律制度的相互借鉴,为建设法治中国提供理论支撑和智识支持。

Contains only texts in English. See in more detail in Aarnio,Essays on the Doctrinal Study of Law (below).

Aarnio,Aulis,Essays on the Doctrinal Study of Law. 2011.

Eckhoff,Torstein,Rettskildelaere. 2nd ed. 1987.

Peczenik,Aleksander,Juridisk argumentation. En l?robok i allm?n r?ttsl?ra (Legal Argumenta-tion. A Textbook in Jurisprudence). In co-operation of Aulis Aarnio and Gunnar Bergholtz. 1990.

Doctrinal Study of Law and Science. In:?sterreichise Zeitschrift für ?ffentliches Recht 1.1967 p.80.

Ross,Alf,Om ret og retfaerdighed (On Law and Justice). 1953.

Str?mholm,Stig,R?tt,r?ttsk?llor och r?ttstill?mpning (Law,Sources of Law and Application of Law). 3rd ed. 1988.

Summers,Robert.S.,The Tyes of Substantive Reasons:The Case of the Theory of Common Law Justification.In:Cornell Law Review 63.1978 p.724.

Baogang He,“Democratization and federalization in Asia”,in Baogang He,Galli-gan B and Inoguchi T,eds.,Federalism in Asia(Edward Elgar:Cheltenham,2007).

Johannes Chan,“Asymmetry in the Face of Heavily Disproportionate Power Relations:Hong Kong”,in:Weller M and Nobbs K,eds.Asymmetric Autonomy and the Settlement of Ethnic Conflicts(University of Pennsylvania Press:Philadelphia & Oxford,2010).

Albert H.Y. Chen,“The Theory,Constitution and Practice of Autonomy:The Case of Hong Kong”,in:Costa Oliveira J and Cardinal P,eds.,One Country,Two Systems,Three Legal Orders-Perspectives of Evolution. Essays on Macau’s Autonomy after the Resumption of Sovereignty by China(Springer Verlag:Berlin & Heidelberg,2009).

Peter T.Y.Cheung “Toward federalism in China?The experience of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region”,in Baogang He,Galligan B and Inoguchi T,eds,Federalism in Asia(Edward Elgar:Cheltenham,2007).

Deng Xiaoping,On “One Country,Two Systems”(Joint Publishing:Hong Kong,2004).

Michael W. Dowdle,“Constitutionalism in the Shadow of the Common Law-The Dys-functional Interpretive Politics of Article 8 of the Hong Kong Basic Law”,in Hualing Fu,Harris L and Young SNM,eds,Interpreting Hong Kong’s Basic Law-The Struggle for Coherence(Palgrave Macmillan:New York,2007).

Brian Galligan,“Federalism in Asia”,in Baogang He,Galligan B and Inoguchi T,eds.,Federalism in Asia(Edward Elgar:Cheltenham,2007).

Huang Jin,“Interaction and Integration Between the Legal Systems of Hong Kong,Macao and Mainland China 50 Years After Their Return to China”,in Costa Oliveira J and Cardinal P,eds.One Country,Two Systems,Three Legal Orders-Perspectives of Evolution(Essays on Macau’s Autonomy after the Resumption of Sovereignty by China. Springer:Berlin & Heidelberg,2009).

Yash Ghai,Hong Kong’s New Constitutional Order:The Resumption of Chinese Sovereignty and the Basic Law (first edition)(Hong Kong University Press:Hong Kong,1997).

Yash Ghai,Hong Kong’s New Constitutional Order:The Resumption of Chinese Sovereignty and the Basic Law(second edition)(Hong Kong University Press:Hong Kong,1999).

Hualing Fu,Lison Harris and Simon Young,“Introduction”,in Hualing Fu,Harris L and Young SNM,eds.,Interpreting Hong Kong’s Basic Law-The Struggle for Coherence(Palgrave Macmillan:New York,2007).

Mei-fun P Leung,The Hong Kong Basic Law:Hybrid of Common Law and Chinese Law(LexisNexis:Hong Kong,Singapore,Malaysia,2006).

Robert J. Morris,“Forcing the Dance-Interpreting the Hong Kong Basic Law Dialectically”,in Hualing Fu,Harris L and Young SNM,eds.,Interpreting Hong Kong’s Basic Law-The Struggle for Coherence(Palgrave Macmillan:New York,2007).

Roda Mushkat,One Country,Two International Legal Personalities:the Case of Hong Kong(Hong Kong University Press:Hong Kong,1997).

Sten Palmgren,“The Autonomy of the ?land Islands in the Constitutional Law of Finland”,in Hannikainen L and Horn F,eds.,Autonomy and Demilitarisation in Interna-tional Law:The ?land Islands in a Changing Europe(Kluwer Law International:the Ha-gue,London & Boston,1997).

Markku Suksi,“On the Entrenchment of Autonomy”. In:Suksi M,ed.,Autonomy:Ap-plications and Implications(Kluwer Law International:Dordrecht,1998).

Markku Suksi,“One (small) country,four different régimes of linguistic rights”,poster for the Seminar on Minority Language Usage and Cultural Development:Chinese Theories and Practices,19-25 August 2006,Lhasa,China,pp.131-133 of the Seminar Guide (pp.29-31 in the Tibetan language and pp.82-83 in the Chinese language).

Markku Suksi,“Stegvisa f?r?ndringar i ?lands?verenskommelsens inneh?ll?” in Aarto M and Vartiainen M,eds.Oikeus kansainv?lisess? maailmassa-Ilkka Saraviidan juhlakir-ja(Edita:Helsinki,2008).

Markku Suksi,Sub-state Governance through Territorial Autonomy(Springer-Verlag:Berlin & Heidelberg,2011).

Markku Suksi,?lands konstitution. ?bo Akademis f?rlag:?bo,2005.

Xiao Weiyun,One Country,Two Systems-An Account of the Drafting of the Hong Kong Basic Law(Peking University Press:Beijing,2001).

Yongnian Zheng,“China’s de facto federalism”,in Baogang He,Galligan B and Inoguchi T,eds.,Federalism in Asia(Edward Elgar:Cheltenham,2007).

M?enp??,O.,Local Government in Finland. Angel-Manuel Moreno,ed.,Local government in the member states of the European Union:a comparative legal perspective. Madrid 2012,pp.185-202.

M?enp??,O.,The Administrative Procedure Act and the Guarantees of Good Administration. Helsinki,2011.

M?enp??,O.,Rozen Noguellou & Ulrich Stelkens,eds.,Comparative Law on Public Contracts. Bruylant. Bruxelles 2010,pp.657-673.

M?enp??,O.,Judicial Procedure in Administrative Courts. Helsinki,2007. (in Finnish)

M?enp??,O.,Openness and Access to Information in Finland,in The World’s First Freedom of Information Act. Kokkola,2006,pp.58-73.

M?enp??,O.,Administrative Law. Helsinki,2004. (in Finnish)

M?enp??,O.,Comparative Analysis of Administrative Law. European Public Law Series Vol. XXIV. London,2002,pp.147-200.

M?enp??,O.,Towards a Unified Judicial Protection of Citizens in Europe. Spiliotopoulos,E.,ed.,Towards a Unified Protection of Citizens in Europe.(London,2000),pp.251-290.

Andenaes,J.(1974),Punishment and Deterrence.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.

Anttila,I.(1971),“Conservative and Radical Criminal Policy in the Nordic Countries,” Scandinavian Studies in Criminology,Vol. 3. Oslo(1967),pp.9-21.

Balvig,F.(2004),“When Law and Order returned to Denmark”,Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology Vol 5(2005),pp.167-187.

Criminal policy in Welfare State:Ministry of Justice Policy Plan for 2007-2011,Ministry of Justice,Helsinki 2006.

Elonheimo,H.(2010),Nuorisorikollisuuden esiintyvyys,taustatekij?t ja sovittelu,Turun Yliopiston julkaisuja 2999/2010,Turku.

Falck,S. von Hofer,H. and Storgaard;A.(2003),Nordic Criminal Statistics 1950-2000,Department of Criminology,Stockholm University,Report 2003:3.

Garland,D.(2001),The Culture of Control—Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society.The University of Chicago Press.

Gr?nfors,M.(1989),“Ideals and reality in community mediation.” In Martin Wright & Burt Galaway,eds.,Mediation and Criminal Justice. London,1989,pp.140-151.

Iivari,J.(2000),“Victim-offender mediation in Finland”,In Victim-Offender Mediation in Europe,Making Restorative Justice Work,Leuven University Press.

Iivari,J.(2010),Oikeutta oikeuden varjossa. Rikossovittelulain t?yt?nt??npanon arviointitutkimus [Justice in the Shadow of Justice],An Evaluation Study of the Implementation of the Act on Mediation in Criminal Cases,National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL),Report 5/2010. 193 pages. Helsinki 2010. ISBN 978-952-245-227-6 (printed),ISBN 978-952-245-228-3 (pdf).

Kivivuori,J. and Lehti M,“Homicide in the Nordic Area:Finland and Sweden Compared.” In Tonry & Lappi-Sepp?l? 2011.

Kivivuori,J. & Kemppi,S. and Smolej,M.(2002),Front-Page Violence,Violence Reporting on the Front Pages of the Finnish Tabloid Press 1980-2000. National Research Institute of Legal Policy. Publication No. 196/2000.

Kristofferssen,R.(2010),Correctional Statistics of Denmark,Finland,Iceland,Norway and Sweden 2004-2008. Correctional Service of Norway Staff Academy 1/2010. Oslo 2010.

Lahti,R.(2000),“Towards a Rational and Humane Criminal Policy (Trends in Scandinavian Penal Thinking.” Journal of Scandinavian Studies and Crime Prevention.Vol 1/2000,pp.141-155.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(1995),“General Prevention-Hypotheses and empirical evidence”. In Ideologi og Empiri i Kriminologien.Scandinavian Research Council for Criminology. Reykjavik 1995.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(1996),“Reparation in Criminal Law-Finnish National Report. “In Albin Eser & Susanne Walther eds. Wiedergutmachung im Strafrecht. Max-Planck-Institut,Freiburg im. Br. 1996. p.317-420.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(2001),“Sentencing and Punishment in Finland:The Decline of the Repressive Ideal”. In Punishment and Penal Systems in Western Countries,edited by M. Tonry and R. Frase.,New York,Oxford University Press,p.92-150.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(2007),“Penal Policy in Scandinavia.” In Crime,Punishment,and Politics in Comparative Perspective,edited by Michael Tonry. Vol. 36 of Crime and Justice:A Review of Research,edited by Michael Tonry(Chicago,University of Chicago Press).

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(2008a),“Trust,Welfare,and Political Culture:Explaining Differences in National Penal Policies.” In Crime and Justice:A Review of Research,vol. 37,edited by Michael Tonry(Chicago,University of Chicago Press).

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(2008b),“Politics or Policy-Fluctuations in the Finnish Penal Policy”,In Ikke kun straf… Festskrift til Vagn Greve. Juris-og ?konomiforbundets Forlag. K?benhavn 2008:333-357.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(2011a),“Nordic Youth Justice:Juvenile Sanctions in Four Nordic Countries.” In Tonry & Lappi-Sepp?l? 2011.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T.(2011b),“Changes in Penal Policy in Finland”. In Helmuth Kury & Evelyn Shea,eds.,Punitivity. International developments. Vol. 1,Punitiveness-global Phenomenon?Universit?t?verlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer. Bochum/Germany,2011.

Lappi-Sepp?l?,T. & Tonry M.(2011),“Crime,Criminal Justice,and Criminology in the Nordic Countries”,In Crime and Justice:A Review of Research,Vol. 40,edited by Michael Tonry & Tapio Lappi-Sepp?l?(Chicago,University of Chicago Press).

Mielityinen,I.(1999),Rikos ja sovittelu. National Research Institute of legal Policy 167/1999. Helsinki.

Tham,H.(2001),“Law and order as a leftist project?” Punishment & Society. The International Journal of Penology,Vol. 3.,No. 3. Sage Publications,pp.409-426.

Tonry,M & Lappi-Sepp?l? T.(2011),Crime and Justice:A Review of Research,Vol. 40,edited by Michael Tonry & Tapio Lappi-Sepp?l?(Chicago,University of Chicago Press).

T?rnudd P.(1993),Fifteen Years of Decreasing Prison Rates in Finland. National Research Institute of Legal Policy. Research Communication 8.

T?rnudd,P.(1996),Facts,Values and Visions. Essays in Criminology and Crime Policy,edited by Inkeri Anttila,Kauko Aromaa,Risto Jaakkola,Tapio Lappi-Sepp?l? & Hannu Takala. National Research Institute of Legal Policy Publication No. 138. Helsinki,1996.

Aall 1996

Aall,J.,Rettergang og menneskerettigheter:den europeiske menneskerettighetskonventions artikkel 6 og norsk straffeprocess(Bergen:Universitetsforlaget,1996).

Andrews 1982

Andrews,J.A. (ed.),Human Rights in Criminal Procedure:A Comparative Study(The Hague:Martinus Nijhoff,1982).

Barzelay 2001

Barzelay M.,The New Public Management:Improving Research and Policy Dialogue(Berkley:University of California Press,2001).

Clarke,Gewertz & McLaughlin 2001

Clarke,J.,Gewertz,S. & McLaughlin,E. (eds.),New Managerialism,New Welfare?(London:Sage Publications,2001).

Drewry 2000

Drewry,G.R.,“Public Management Reform:A Challenge to Judicial Independence?”,in Fabri,M. & Langbroek,P.M.,eds.,The Challenge of Change for Judicial Systems:Developing a Public Administration Perspective,Amsterdam etc.(IOS Press,2000),p.93-110.

Edel. F.,The length of civil and criminal proceedings in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Council of European Publishing 2nd ed. 2007

Ervasti 2005

Ervasti K.,“Riidat k?r?j?oikeuksissa. Empiirinen tutkimus riita-asioista ja oikeudenk?yntikuluista”(217 Oikeuspoliittinen tutkimuslaitos,2005).

Ervasti 2007

Ervasti K.,“Conflicts Before the Courts and Court-annexed Mediation in Finland”,in Wahlgren. P.,ed.,Procedural Law-Court Administrations:Scandinavian Studies in Law,Vol. 51,(Stockholm:Almqvist & Wiksell,2007),p.185-200.

Ervasti Kaijus,Riita-asiat tuomioistuimissa. In Lasola Marjukka,ed.,Oikeusolot 2009. Oikeuspoliittisen tutkimuslaitoksen julkaisuja 244/2009,s. 43-64.

Ervo 1995

Ervo L.,“The Reform of Civil Procedure in Finland”,Civil Justice Quarterly,(1995),p.56-64.

Ervo 1997

Ervo,L.,“The Principle of the Free Reception of Evidence in Finland”,in Nijboer J.F. & Reijntjes J.M.,eds.,Proceedings of the First World Conference on New Trends in Criminal Investigation and Evidence(Open University of the Netherlands,1997),pp.295-299.

Ervo 2001

Ervo L.,“Order for Payment in Finland”,in Rechenberger,W.H. & Kodek Georg,E. eds.,Orders for Payment in the European Union(The Hague:Kluwer,2001),p.121-129.

European Court of Human Rights,Analysis of Statistics 2010,http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/0A35997B-B907-4A38-85F4-A93113A78F10/0/Analysis_of_statistics_2010.pdf

Fabri & Langbroek 2000

Fabri,M. & Langbroek,P.M.,eds.,The Challenge of Change for Judicial Systems:Developing a Public Administration Perspective,Amsterdam etc.(IOS Press,2000).

Jacob 2006

Jacob,J.,Civil Justice in the Age of Human Rights(Ashgate:Darthmouth,2006).

Johnsen & Smolej 2006

Johnsen,J. & Smolej,M.,“Time management of justice systems:a Northern Europe study”. Taskforce of Timeframes for Proceedings,CEPEJ (2006)14. https://wcd.coe.int.

Jokela 2002

Jokela,J.,“Legal Procedure”,in P?yh?nen,J.,ed.,An introduction to Finnish Law(Helsinki:Finnish Lawyer’s Publishing,2002),pp.357-402.

Laukkanen 2007

Laukkanen,S.,“Last Trends in the Finnish Civil Procedure and Judicial Administration”,in Vebraite,V.,ed.,The Recent Tendencies of Development in Civil Procedure Law:Between East and West. International Conference to Celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Birth of Professor Jonas ?eruolis(Vilnus:Justitia,2007),p.72-82.

Lane 2000

Lane,J-E.,New Public Management(London:Routledge,2000).

Lepp?nen 1998

Lepp?nen,T.,Riita-asian valmistelu todistusaineiston osalta(Helsinki:Finnish Lawyers’ Association,1998). (Civil Pre-Trial Procedure concerning evidence,with an English summary).

Loveday 2000

Loveday,B.,“Measuring Performance in Criminal Justice:An Initial Evaluation of the Application of the New Public Management to Criminal Justice Agencies in England and Wales”,in Fabri,M. & Langbroek,P.M.,eds.,The Challenge of Change for Judicial Systems:Developing a Public Administration Perspective,Amsterdam etc.(IOS Press,2000),p.167-186.

Ng 2007

Ng,G.Y.,Quality of Judicial Organisation and Checks and Balances(Antwerpen:Intersentia,2007).

Niemi 2010

Niem,J.,“Finland,Civil Procedure”,in Taelman P.,ed.,International Encyclopaedia of Laws:Civil Procedure(The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2010).

Nylund 2006

Nylund,A.,“Tillg?ngen till den andra instansen i tvistem?l”. Finnish Lawyers’ Association,2006.

Osborne & Gaebler 1992

Osborne,R. & Gaebler,T.,Reinventing Government:How Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector(MA:Addison-Welsley,Reading,1992).

Pihlajam?ki 1997

Pihlajam?ki,H.,Evidence,Crime,and the Legal Profession:the Emergence of Free Evaluation of Evidence in the Finnish Nineteenth Century Criminal Procedure(Lund:Institutet f?r r?ttshistorisk forskning,1997).

Sanjeev Reddy 2006

P.L. Sanjeev Reddy,“Foreword”,in Bakore,M. & Shah,P.J.,eds.,Handbook on New Public Government(New Delhi:Center for Civil Society,2006),pp.ix-xxi.

Spolander 2007

Spolander,M.M.,Menettelyn joutuisuus oikeudenmukaisen oikeudenk?ynnin osatekij?n? erityisesti Euroopan ihmisoikeustuomioistuimen ratkaisuk?yt?nn?n valossa (Reasonable length of proceedings as part of a fair trial,particularly in the light of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights),Finnish Lawyers’ Association,2007.

Stavros 1993

Stavros,S.,The Guarantees for Accused Persons under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights:An Analysis of the Application of the Convention and a Comparison with other Instruments(Dordrecht:Martinus Nijhoff,1993).

Storme 2007

Storme M.,“Tomorrow’s Civil Trial”,in Verbraite,V.,eds.,The Recent Tendencies of Development in Civil Procedure Law-Between East and West. International Conference to Celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Birth of Professor Jonas ?eruolis(Vilnius:Justitia,2007),pp.14-25.

Trechsel 2005

Trechsel,S.,Human Rights in Criminal Proceedings(Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005).

Zuckermann 1999

Zuckermann A.S.,ed.,Civil Justice in Crisis:Comparative Perspectives of Civil Procedure(Oxford;New York:Oxford University Press,1999).

Alessi,Dario,“Unfair Contractual Advantage in Finnish and Italian Law:A Comparative Analysis”,Turku Law Journal(2003):pp.3-33.

B?rlund,Johan,“The Concept of Business Undertaking in Finnish and European Consumer Law:A Critical Review of a Finnish Supreme Court Case”,Scandinavian Studies in Law 57 (not yet published).

Viitanen,Klaus,“Implementation of the EC Directive on Product Liability in Finland”. In The Implementation Process of EU-directives on Product Safety,Product Liability and Unfair Contract Terms,edited by Francoise Maniet and Beata Dunaj. Proceedings of a conference held in Riga on 13-14 October 1994,European Union,EFTA,pp.165-177.

Viitanen,Klaus,“The Scandinavian Public Complaint Boards:the Aims,Present Situation and the Future”Consumer Law Journal 4,(1996)pp.118-126.

Viitanen,Klaus,“The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and Marketing Targeted at Minors”. in Private Law and the Many Cultures of Europe,edited by Thomas Wilhelmsson,Elina Paunio and Annika Pohjolainen,Alphen aan den Rijn 2007,pp.283-303.

Viitanen,Klaus,“Enforcement of Consumers’ Collective Interests by Regulatory Agencies in the Nordic Countries”,in Collective Enforcement of Consumer Law. Securing Compliance in Europe through Private Group Action and Public Authority Intervention,edited by Willem van Boom and Marco Loos,Groningen 2007,pp.81-103.

Viitanen,Klaus,“Nordic Experiences on Group Action for Compensation”,in Auf dem Weg zu einer europ?ichen Sammelklage?edited by Mathias Casper,Andre Janssen,Petra Pohlmann ja Reiner Schulze,Munich 2009,pp.219-241.

Wilhemsson,Thomas,Twelwe Essays on Consumer Law and Policy. Publications of the Department of Private Law No.51. University of Helsinki. Edited by Tuuli Junkkari. Helsinki,1996.

Wilhemsson,Thomas,“The Implementation of the EC directive on Unfair Contract Terms in Finland”,European Review of Private Law(1997),pp.151-156.

1.《中共中央总书记、国家主席、中央军委主席胡锦涛在省部级主要领导干部社会管理及其创新专题研讨班开班式的重要讲话》。

2.姜明安:《发展、改革、创新与法治》,《中共中央党校学报》2011年第8期。

3.中共天津市委党校第81期进修一班“民生与社会建设”课题组:《当前社会管理体制创新的意义、内容及实践》,2011年6月。

4.付子堂:《构建法治型社会管理模式》,《检察风云》2011年第10期。

5.陆敏菊:《法治内涵再探讨》。